Different half terms

[onceortwice]

My two children (1 school year apart) have been started school this September. For various reasons, they have started different schools with different half terms. I fact, DD will get just over two weeks while DS will only get one, and they only overlap by 3 days.

I do appreciate that I'll just have to deal with it, but wondering if anyone had tips on how to deal with the inevitable arguments of one going to school when the other doesn't have to?

Assuming these are state schools, they all have. 190 days of school/year, so it will even out eventually.

No ,DS is state. DD is private.

It's a long story and they have both settled well, but I am expecting problems to arise..

DD is expected to do a lot more (which ds would hate) but she also gets a lot more time off

I teach in a neighbouring county to where I live (and where my children go to school).

I have 3 weeks this year - autumn and spring term half terms, and a week of the Easter holidays - which don't overlap at all, so 3 weeks when I am in school and they are not, and 3 when they are in school and I am not.

Am a bit

I had this, DS had longer days because of having to catch the minibus but fewer days because it was private. But then other DC got polling days off (oh, and strike day, this year).

What about "Do you like your school? Well your school is right for you & these are the days you need to go to that school." And point out how the DD with shorter terms has more homework, does more work overall. I suspect the grumbles will settle down once they are used to it all.

Well, you've answered your own question then.... DD is expected to do a lot more (which ds would hate) but she also gets a lot more time off

Surely if you are worried about how your children view what they percieve as 'unfairness' of a few days when one isn't at school and the other is, then there is a FAR bigger elephant in the room over one having a paid for private education, and the other not ?

That argument presumes that somewhere physically feasible for OP, is a private school for the state-ed child which would be much better (for that child) than that child's current state school. And that OP has denied her child the opportunity of attending this other hypothetical (private) school. And that state-ed child even wants to go there instead of current school, or that it would be in child's best interests to go there even if they don't know it.

Lotsa IFs.

DS private school was a bit pants! Glad to see the back of it. Right for him at the time, not in best interests of other DC to ever go there.

It does, lljkk, you are right, but then I don't think it's a big leap from knowing that someone paying for a private education, to thinking that they perceive that a private education is better (otherwise, obviously you wouldn't pay out).
OP hasn't (and needn't) explained the situation to us, but my point is that, explaining away to 2 dc why one is in school one day while the other is off, is going to be a walk in the park compared with explaining why one was worth paying out for and the other wasn't. All of us with children at separate schools will have days where one child has a day at home while another is in school.

I have this exact situation.
I just say 'yes, ds2 is at home but you are at school. That must suck for you'

Obviously I make it age appropriate but I ave ever told my children that their lives will always include the exact same experiences. Because life isn't like that. And because 'it's not fair' is the rallying cry of whiney, miserable fuckers everywhere.

It's not fair. Oh well....

I have the same situation and simply say, that different schools operate to different timetables and point out the times DS doesn't go to school and DD does.

As for one in state and one in private. I don't see the issue. We moved DD from her state school as she was incredibly unhappy and we couldn't get her a state place somewhere we were happy with. DS stayed state as he was happy and doing well in an excellent school, albeit one which didn't suit DD.

We have never told him her school is private, it is irrelevant to a 9 year old. We have been extremely clear with him that she is at the right school for HER and he is at the right school for HIM. We have made no financial sacrifice to send DD privately. DS can still do everything he wants, we haven't changed our standard of living as a family, no less holidays, no change in days out, meals out, cars etc.

It depends if you think private is always better, I firmly believe that given we have fantastic state schools in an area where people regularly dip in and out of both, that there is no issue.

Hi, onceortwice, I remember reading your previous threads, and I hope that the first few days have gone well.

Would the "it's just like this, live with it" approach (which I would usually heartily endorse) be workable with your DC?

If not then perhaps fuller explanation will work over time, but for the first halfterm, it might be worth having some sort of additional treat (extra special outing?) to even it up a bit. That could be seized on by DC as a precedent - but perhaps a suitable extra autumn treat might be something generally helpful?

I remember as a child, if a teacher had to be in school, and their child didn't, very often they would bring their child with them. Does this ever happen any more?

Thanks Edith.

There are VERY good reasons they are at different schools. It is not a decision we took lightly.

It is the right decision. If it wasn't, I would have FAR more difficult conversations on my hands rather than half term break

The fact I'm worried about holidays shows how right the schools are for my children

Backforgood - it has nothing to do with wanting to pay for one and not the other. I want(ed) to pay for both. My choice - not looking for a bunflight on private education. More a problem of the private sector not wanting my DS. Given the reasons behind that, I don't think either of my children will question why they are at different schools.

My friend used to take her children into school (up until the last year or so when they got old enough that they could be left at home by themselves).